Stem cell breakthrough: don't forget ethics.

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Stepwise Induction of Inner Ear Hair Cells From Mouse Embryonic Fibroblasts via Mesenchymal- to-Epithelial Transition and Formation of Otic Epithelial Cells.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2021
   Article
2. Generation of chimeric rhesus monkeys.Cell · 2012
   Article
3. A review of gene delivery and stem cell based therapies for regenerating inner ear hair cells.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2011
   Article
4. Regenerating cochlear hair cells: quo vadis stem cell.Cell and tissue research · 2008
   Review
5. Stem cells and molecular strategies to restore hearing.Panminerva medica · 2008
   Review

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Induced pluripotent stem cell lines derived from human somatic cells.2007

Authors and funding

1 author.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as